Sam Thumper

+ Follow
since Sep 19, 2019
Merit badge: bb list bbv list
Biography
Former physicist, now a permaculture farmer.
For More
Ozarks of Missouri
Apples and Likes
Apples
Total received
In last 30 days
0
Forums and Threads

Recent posts by Sam Thumper

Chiming on to this comment on diet.
"that the diet plays a crucial role in protecting us from the sun"

I've heard from a couple sources that consuming seed oils disrupts the skin's ability to withstand sunlight without burning.  One reference
https://drcate.com/seed-oil-makes-sunburn-worse-and-ages-your-skin/
2 years ago
Yes, that is what I'm talking about.  A size where in colder nights it might just be a one room heater that keeps people from freezing to death when they can't afford electric heat, but is at a price to purchase and install that is affordable enough for those same people that can't afford electric/gas heat.  

Affordable install requires a clean burn so there is no creosote, which allows a cool chimney which avoids the very expensive double or triple walled flue pipes.  Perhaps a 3" single walled pipe can be made to work.  

This would make a stove average working class people can afford to buy, install and use in small urban dwellings.  
2 years ago
"I'm afraid that statement conflicts with itself.
A wide-open hot burn but somehow it burns longer and ?? at a lower BTU...
Not happening, my friend. "

"Wide-open" is a stoichiometric burn, it just means having enough O2 to burn all the fuel and it's gases in the burn chamber and riser;  "Hot" is achieved with an insulated (or heat reflective) riser with an effective thermal mass and burn volume that is small relative to the BTUs generated thereby achieving a high temperature.  A long burn is achieved by doing the first two with it sized for a trickle of pellets that contains the BTU rate of interest.  a pound of pellets is rough 8,000 BTUs, so maybe you burn 1.5 lbs per hour.  

edit:  So a 40lb bag put in the hopper will burn for 24hrs straight.

Can you do that and still make it "rocket"?  maybe?

At least that is what I'm thinking
2 years ago
I've been thinking, based on discussion in the thread on spreading the word on Rocket Mass heaters, that widespread adoption of rocket heaters requires a different design.  I'd like to lay out my hypothesis and hope people will critique it.

1.  The majority (likely 95+%) of the population would never build or install a RMH.  They are scared of building a stove, of carbon monoxide, of the mass, of doing something like that in their house/trailer/apartment, etc.  There are struggles with insurance and codes.  and there is not enough skilled labor to hire it out.  Many people have commented on this.  It is just a fact, advertising or education won't fix this.

2.  Widespread adoptions of sustainable wood heating requires something that is:
a.  Off the shelf
b. standardized (UL listed, and meets code)
c.  Easy to install in a wide range of dwellings with minimal modifications
d.  Affordable  
e.  maximize percent of usable heat in the dwelling for a given fuel input
f.  Very clean burn to not have localized air quality issues.


3.   The traditional woods stove achieves a, b, and c.  but struggles with d, e, and f.  You either burn fast, which produces more BTUs than needed for a brief period and pumps lots of heat and pollution  out the chimney.  Or you damper it down which creates condensation of creosote in the chimney and eventual chimney fires.  One solution to minimize condensation and or risk to the dwelling from overheating the chimney is triple layer insulated chimney which is very expensive.    

4.  The Traditional RMH design achieves e and f by introducing a high temperature burn riser which burns nearly all the fuel.   This allows the chimney to be cooler without a creosote problem, which then allows depositing a greater fraction of the heat inside the house, and also gives less pollution in the output.  

5.  However the RMH achieves this high temperature burn by running fast and hot (wide open) on stick or cord wood creating a high BTU output for a short period.  This requires an efficient way to store that heat energy for use over an extended period, which is solved by a custom thermal mass and custom install.  If you are a homesteader RMH pioneer a, b, and c are less a factor and you achieve d (affordability) by doing it yourself.  But for the average population, that needs to hire it out, requiring the thermal mass pushes things into a custom space where factors a, b, c, and d preclude widespread adoption.      

6.   If you can achieve the wide open hot burn but yet have a long burn at a lower BTU output then the large thermal mass is not needed.  I think the candidate design for a achieving this in an off the shelf system is a pellet rocket heater, with the insulated riser to achieve the high temp and clean burn, a small burn chamber and riser and a low pellet feed rate to give a low BTU output, and a design to extract most of the heat before going up the exhaust pipe so it can be both small and cool (cheap).  

has anyone tried this?  If they have I haven't been able to find it.  

The liberator has a pellet adaptor, but it is sized for a higher BTU output and nominally still needs a thermal mass.  The Wiseways is designed for a use without the thermal mass, but it doesn't have an insulated heat riser to give the "rocket" with a hot efficient burn so you send more heat/pollution up the exhaust pipe.  

I'm thinking the right design can be similar to the wood stove in price <$1000, but much cheaper on the chimney cost.  

For people in rural areas it is better having something that takes sticks and cord wood, but for urban dwellers, the logistics will favor getting pellet fuel through local stores.  

2 years ago
Another thought on making a mass produced stove that is inexpensive and easy to install.

The thermal mass size and construction (e.g. cob bench) prevents widespread adoption and drives the price very high.  I say this as for widespread adoption you have to realize people will not be doing their own labor, they will hire, the labor doesn't exist except at a price point that makes the whole thing only for the rich.  It is like Adobe buildings.  The rich afford them with hired labor, and the poor laborers afford them with labor (in the old days, most people are too lazy now) .  

As Sean pointed out upthread, even those mostly in the lifestyle are scared to build a stove, scared of carbon monoxide, scared of the hulking cob mass.

The solution to this isn't getting the word out...it is coming up with a mass produced product.

The traditional wood stove can be mass produced and easily/quickly installed, you put in a lot of wood and dump a lot of heat out the chimney or creosote it up, but the stove DOES act as the thermal mass and radiant heater and does a fine job at that...it is just the burn method and chimney design that is the issue.   The thermal mass size is sufficient because you throttle the thing back giving a long slow burn.

So why not combine the two.     What I'm thinking is a slow pellet feed (like the liberator 2) but a smaller burn chamber and chimney in a smaller unit.  Can you still get the rocket effect, with the trickle in of pellets and a smaller burn chamber and chimney?  If so you can get a long slow burn that doesn't exceed the thermal mass of the stove itself...Now it heats with convection and radiation like a traditional wood stove, but burns clean and efficiently with like a rocket stove and comes in a package that can be mass produced and easily installed by "normal" people.  

2 years ago
More thoughts:

-As others pointed out, it needs to be UL listed and EPA approved
--With new wood burners it will need to be safe and robust against dumb mistakes

-You'd like it to be able to retrofit into existing chimneys, be free standing, and be moveable

-You want it to function with no electricity

-You'd like people to be able to enhance it as they become comfortable with it.  The basic stove allows you and your pipes to make it through the winter and heat a pot of food/water/beans.  Then later there is an option to add thermal mass in some fashion, then later water heating capability can be integrated, etc.  

-I'm thinking just in my general (low population density) area to make an impact a goal would be maybe  50 stoves produced and installed per day.

2 years ago
Very timely.  I've recently been reviewing (again) rocket heaters, wood stoves, production factories, etc.  I'm looking to see if there is a design close enough for mass production.  I've been following rocket heater work (permies, youtube, etc) for over a decade.  

The early adopters had the time, intellect, and inclination to invest in building beautiful well performing stoves and were willing to devote significant square footage to it.  The very large majority of people aren't interested in building something, don't have the money to pay someone, if they did have the money there is a shortage of skilled labor,  don't want to devote a lot of square footage to the thermal mass, and don't want to have to tinker with it.  

 What is needed to weather a crisis like what is happening in Europe  (likely coming soon to the US) is widespread adoption of small, mass produced, cost effective stoves that people can just buy off the shelf and are quick to install.  Is this stove a rocket stove?....I'd hope so as when a large percent of people are heating with wood unless it is really efficient you are going to have a pollution problem and a wood shortage.     I've looked at the Liberator...it frankly needs to be at about 1/3 the price point to see widespread adoption.

anything I'm missing?  what do I have wrong here?
2 years ago
I've been looking at different solar dehydrator designs, primarily different versions of the down draft design.  I ran across this youtube where an old refrigerator has been turned into the cabinet.  I have an old refrigerator, I like the idea of reusing it and having a good sealing door.  But I'm leery of plastic outgassing.  has anyone else looked at this?  What do folks think about this approach?  Thanks
3 years ago